[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]BrianHanson wrote:
Push,
I think they were voting for some fairness in the economic system, [/quote]
What isn’t fair about the current one?
I think it is clear that the shrinking middle class and the wealth-gap indicates a growing unfairness in the current system. Anybody can get rich in this country, what pisses people off is that the rich make the rules, they influence the votes, they have access to decision makers, hell congress has been insider trading for years, using their influence and knowledge to get rich while the working stiff does the same thing and goes to jail. America is not a rigged system, but it definitely favors those that already have money and power.
What are we cutting to pay for this?
We are about 1.4 trillion over extended. What are you cutting to pay for this? Food Stamps? Planned Parenthood? Medicare? Social Security? Defense?
We will cut some from a few programs, defense is obviously the low hanging fruit, but we can always raise more revenue as well, 1/4% raise on the employee portion of SS taxes, eliminate the upper limit cap on SS taxes, maybe institute a 1/2%-1% national sales tax on non-perishable goods (last year that would have been around 50-100 billion I believe) people hate taxes, but we can’t complain about a debt figure and refuse to pay it down
[quote]
Most people want to know that Social Security and Healthcare will be around for them, and if that means eliminating the upper limit on employee contributions then they are fine with it.[/quote]
Medicare doesn’t have an upper limit, and all raising the limit does is kick the can down the road so my daughter has to fix the problem. She says “No dada you handle your own mistakes”.
Oh and what was Obama’s plan to fix SS?
Raising the limit means paying more each paycheck, how is that kicking the can down the road? If people want SS they will have to pay for it.
I live in Mass, I’m pretty sure you don’t want to hear an actual description of a typical liberal Dem.
I’m farther to the left than most I’m also a veteran from a family where every male has served as much as 30 years in the military, we all vote democrat and we all love America, it’s a sample size of thirty six people (uncles, granddads, brothers and cousins) the assumption that libs hate America is just as true as the one where all Repubs are in militias and/or the klan.
No, maybe the older people.
You could cut defense to zero and still spend 500 billion more than we take in.
yes, I guess we shouldn’t cut anything at all, I guess you’re right (that’s what you’re saying isn’t it?)
I don’t expect to cut defense spending to 0, or even by 50%, I expect to close bases and consolidate our forces, saving billions in unneeded security and expensive resupplying of troops in bases all over the world.
YES! lets ignore market forces or allocation of resources, and force the market to put resources where it doesn’t want them to be.
This should work perfectly I tell you, can’t see a single thing wrong here…
God forbid we have American businesses operate in America. If the corporate tax rate is competitive why would they go somewhere else? Oh, maybe cheap labor, no environmental regulations etc. I am not for turning the US into a 3rd world country, I am also not for letting businesses reap the rewards of our economy without contributing anything to its growth.
Indentured Servitude?
(Not that I have a problem with welfare recipient working, just hesitant to instantly make the government employees.)
Clearly you don’t understand that we already do this (and have for years) on a small scale, It’s not indentured servitude, it’s OJT with pay and bennies (that they already receive through social welfare programs), at this point you seem to be contrary for no reason at all. these people would not be federal employees in the career sense, they would be more like the seasonal help the post office hires, no seniority, no raises, no retirement, just a two year period of training to prepare for life after welfare.
[